Monday, July 30, 2012

Police announced the arrest without naming the suspect, while a source close to the newspaper's publisher, News International, confirmed it was Nick Parker.

The source asked not to be named discussing internal company business.

The arrest is the latest in a long-running police investigation prompted by illegal eavesdropping at the defunct Murdoch tabloid The News of the World, which has expanded into probes of computer hacking, bribery and corruption.

Phone-hacking charges announced

Explain it to me: UK tabloid scandal

Jukes: Brown testimony hurt Murdoch

The relationship between press and power

Parker was arrested earlier as part of the corruption investigation, the source close to News International said.

He has not been charged.

The first charges for phone hacking itself came last week, as prosecutors charged a former aide to British Prime Minister David Cameron and a close confidant of media baron Rupert Murdoch, along with six others.

Cameron's former director of communications, Andy Coulson, and Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of Murdoch's News International, were charged Tuesday.

The announced names of the suspected hacking victims include some of the world's biggest celebrities, including Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Paul McCartney, soccer star Wayne Rooney and actor Jude Law.

The phone-hacking accusations have reverberated through the top levels of British politics and journalism, led to the closing of a major tabloid and prompted a parliamentary committee to issue damning criticism of Murdoch.

The charging announcement delivers one more public relations blow to Murdoch, who stepped down from a string of company boards of directors earlier this month and further distanced himself from the print business that first brought him fame and fortune.

Coulson and Brooks are former editors of The News of the World, which was shut down last year in the face of public outrage at the hacking scandal.

Parent company News Corp.'s multibillion-dollar bid to take over British Sky Broadcasting collapsed as the scandal spread.

Brooks, who was charged with conspiracy to intercept voice mails of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, vigorously denied the charges, saying she was "distressed and angry."

Coulson said he "wouldn't and, more importantly, that I didn't, do anything to damage the Milly Dowler investigation."

The scandal exploded with the revelation that the phone of Dowler, a 13-year-old British girl, was hacked after she disappeared in 2002. She was later found murdered. Indications that her voice mail had been accessed had given her parents the false hope she was still alive.

Prosecutors allege there were more than 600 victims of phone hacking between 2000 and 2006.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Two of Rupert Murdoch’s former editors, Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, are being charged with conspiring to hack the phone of the missing schoolgirl Milly Dowler.

In all seven senior News of the World journalists are being charged with conspiring to intercept the voicemails of a total of 600 victims, the Crown Prosecution announced today.

Glenn Mulcaire, the paper’s private detective, will also face charges in relation four victims including the former Home Secretary Charles Clarke and TV cook Delia Smith.

They are the first charges for phone hacking to be brought for six years, since 2006 when the News of the World royal editor, Clive Goodman, was prosecuted for hacking the phones of three royal aides.

Rupert Murdoch closed the News of the World in July last year after it emerged that the Sunday paper had hacked the mobile phone of Milly Dowler.

Anger over the news led to the Prime Minister David Cameron establishing the Leveson Inquiry into press standards.

All seven journalists – including former managing editor Stuart Kuttner and news editor Ian Edmondson – will be charged with offences under the 1977 Criminal Law Act at police stations.

At a press conference in central London, the CPS’s senior lawyer Alison Levitt said they were being charged at with conspiring to hack the phones of 600 as yet un-named victims between 2000 and 2006.

They are also all charged with additional conspiracy to intercept communications offences linked to specific victims.

Under these additional offences, Coulson - who became head of communications for the Prime Minister David Cameron - is being charged with conspiring to hack the phones of Milly Dowler, Calum Best, Charles Clarke and David Blunkett.

Brooks, News International’s chief executive until last July, is being charged with conspiring to hack the phones of Milly Dowler and the former FBU leader Andrew Gilchrist.

The former chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck is charged in relation to seven alleged victims including Milly Dowler and the former England manager Sven-Goran Eriksson.

Other former senior NoW staff being charged are news editors Greg Miskiw and James Weatherup.

Ms Levitt said: “All, with the exception of Glenn Mulcaire, will be charged with conspiring to intercept communications without lawful authority, from 3 October 2000 to 9 August 2006. The communications in question are the voicemail messages of well-known people and / or those associated with them. There is a schedule containing the names of over 600 people whom the prosecution will say are the victims of this offence.”

She added: “In addition, each will face a number of further charges of conspiracy unlawfully to intercept communications.”

These are the additional charges – and the victims:

Rebekah Brooks will face two additional charges:

1. The first relates to the voicemails of the late Milly Dowler

2. The second to the voicemails of Andrew Gilchrist

Andrew Coulson will face four additional charges, relating to the following victims:

1. Milly Dowler

2. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

3. The Rt Hon Charles Clarke, and

4. Calum Best

Stuart Kuttner will face two additional charges, relating to:

1. Milly Dowler and

2. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

Greg Miskiw will face nine further charges, relating to the following victims or groups of victims:

1. Milly Dowler

2. Sven-Goran Eriksson

3. Abigail Titmuss and John Leslie

4. Andrew Gilchrist

5. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

6. Delia Smith

7. The Rt Hon Charles Clarke

8. Jude Law, Sadie Frost and Sienna Miller, and

9. Wayne Rooney

Ian Edmondson will face a further eleven charges, relating to the following victims or groups of victims:

1. the Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

2. the Rt Hon Charles Clarke

3. Jude Law, Sadie Frost and Sienna Miller

4. Mark Oaten

5. Wayne Rooney

6. Calum Best

7. The Rt Hon Dame Tessa Jowell MP and David Mills

8. The Rt Hon Lord Prescott

9. Professor John Tulloch

10. Lord Frederick Windsor

11. Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills

Neville Thurlbeck will face a further seven charges in relation to the following victims or groups of victims:

1. Milly Dowler

2. Sven-Goran Eriksson

3. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

4. The Rt Hon Charles Clarke

5. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt

6. Mark Oaten

7. The Rt Hon Dame Tessa Jowell MP and David Mills

James Weatherup will face a further seven charges in relation to the following victims or groups of victims:

1. The Rt Hon David Blunkett MP

2. The Rt Hon Charles Clarke

3. Jude Law, Sadie Frost and Sienna Miller

4. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt

5. Wayne Rooney

6. The Rt Hon Lord Prescott

7. Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills

For legal reasons Glenn Mulcaire does not face the first of these charges. However, he will face four charges, relating to:

1. Milly Dowler

2. Andrew Gilchrist

3. Delia Smith

4. The Rt Hon Charles Clarke

Ms Levitt said: “During June and July 2012, the Crown Prosecution Service received files of evidence from the Metropolitan Police Service, relating to thirteen suspects. This has followed a period of consultation and cooperation between police and prosecutors which has taken place over many months.

“All the evidence has now carefully been considered. Applying the two-stage test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors I have concluded that in relation to eight of these thirteen suspects there is sufficient evidence for there to be a realistic prospect of conviction in relation to one or more offences.

“I then considered the second stage of the test, applying the DPP’s interim guidelines on assessing the public interest in cases involving the media, and I have concluded that a prosecution is required in the public interest in relation to each of these eight suspects.

At least if Brooks goes down it will be a victory for Madeleine. The lies between her, Clarence Mitchell ,McCanns and the SUN to sell copy was a criminal act. The fabricated sightings , trying to frame innocent people for an abduction that never happened. Making money from this small child who is now a cottage industry, has gone down in history. Without Brooks the McCann's disinformation campaign would never have worked.RIP Maddie.

Article

Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson are among eight people who have been charged over phone hacking, the Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed.

Brooks, former editor of the News Of The World (NOTW) and The Sun, is being charged in relation to the alleged accessing of murdered Milly Dowler's phone messages.

She released a statement after the announcement, saying she was "distressed and angry" by the decision and denying any involvement in phone hacking.

Coulson, who quit as David Cameron's chief spin doctor in January 2011 and also used to edit the NOTW, is also accused in relation to allegedly hacking into the schoolgirl's phone.

Private investigator Glenn Mulcaire and a series of former NOTW staff are also facing charges as part of Operation Weeting.

They include ex-NOTW managing editor Stuart Kuttner, former news editor Greg Miskiw, former head of news Ian Edmondson and former reporter James Weatherup.

Neville Thurlbeck, who was chief reporter of the now-defunct Sunday tabloid, faces charges in relation to victims including Milly Dowler, Sven-Goran Eriksson, Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt and David Blunkett MP.

John Whittingdale, chairman of the Culture Select Committee, told Sky News he was "not wholly surprised" by the announcement.

Thurlbeck is former chief reporter of the News of The World

"It's not a day which reflects well on politics or the press, but I think it's part of the process of ensuring that this never happens again," he said.

CPS legal adviser Alison Levitt QC said there was a "realistic prospect of conviction" in relation to eight of the 13 files passed to the CPS by police.

All of them apart from Mulcaire will be charged with conspiring to intercept communications without lawful authority between October 3, 2000 and August 9, 2006.

Prosecutors will claim that more than 600 people were victims of this offence.

Brooks is to face two additional charges relating to illegally accessing the voicemails of Milly Dowler and former trade union boss Andrew Gilchrist.

The ex-chief executive of News International, which published the NOTW, said in a statement: "I am not guilty of these charges. I did not authorise, nor was I aware of, phone hacking under my editorship.

"I am distressed and angry that the CPS have reached this decision when they knew all the facts and were in a position to stop the case at this stage.

"The charge concerning Milly Dowler is particularly upsetting not only as it is untrue but also because I have spent my journalistic career campaigning for victims of crime.

"I will vigorously defend these allegations."

Coulson is to be charged over the phone hacking of Milly Dowler, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke and George Best's son Calum.

Having followed the 'Maddie' case from the outset, and commented publicly upon it for a number of years, recent events have caused me to view the affair from an altogether different perspective. No, I have not been 'got at.' Of course I have been incensed by the blatant injustices on many fronts. I would not have devoted so much time to analyses of the case otherwise. But there is only so much to be learned, so much to be accomplished by continually patrolling the base of a pyramid. To really appreciate the significance of its dimensionality it is essential to adopt a different point of view. And I am not talking about succumbing to the idea of a swarthy abductor or cabal of unidentified child molesters.

I do not shrink from admitting that I too was initially astonished by the 'safeguarding of international relations' argument brought forth to justify the withholding of intelligence in the face of several FOI requests. There have been numerous astonishing developments over the years. However, those of us who throw up our hands in disbelief at officialdom's use of the phrase 'international security' or the like are perhaps guilty of a singular and significant oversight; namely, that the very disappearance of Madeleine McCann was itself an international incident, with potential consequences on several levels.

Self-preservation as a principle is a given among homo sapiens. But in any hierarchically organized society, 'looking after number one' is sometimes best accomplished by acting (or at the very least appearing to act) in the interests of others besides. The successful conduct of International Relations demands that players on the international stage see the bigger picture.

So what picture should we be looking at in the McCann case? I would suggest that the government then (and the government now) have acted in the ways they have, not despite 'early warning signs' that the parents of Madeleine McCann may have been involved themselves in a misdemeanour, but because of them.

Only the other evening I listened to a rather smart comedian who pointed up the absurdity of the concept 'War on Terror.' "What results from a declaration of war?" he asks of a hypothetical advocate for the Bush/Blair position. "Terror," they reply. "So you're waging war on the consequences of your own actions then?" Such humour immunises us against depressing acknowledgement that world leaders as often as not depend on the gullibility of the masses for their own survival. And if the masses cannot be misled they can be subdued. This is, I accept, a cynical point of view, but one has only to flip through the pages of history to see how deception via propaganda has a long track record. A tried-and-tested method for keeping one's place on the throne, as it were, is that of convincing those outside the palace that the other man is the enemy.

As society has evolved, so too has this 'threat,' becoming increasingly abstruse in the process. Hence post-war generations in the west have been warned against (among other things) 'communism,' 'alien invasion,' 'nuclear attack' and, of course, 'terror,' the last being a real 'doozy.' A-specific to a fault, it can be blamed on any disaffected minority whatsoever, and at any time. Thus it can never be neutralized.

Largely as a direct result of 'war debt' to our erstwhile transatlantic colony, the British Isles have long since become USS UK, an aircraft and cruise missile carrier permanently stationed in the North Atlantic. It doesn't matter much who gets to captain the ship, since they are never going to command the 'battle group' of which it is a member. In similarly subordinate fashion the Westminster government has been honour-bound to adopt the same cautionary attitudes toward the same perceived enemy as that determined by the White House. This state of affairs is reliably reflected in manifestations of the public consciousness (think Quatermass, The War Game, and the long-running Blair case for WMD).

But what has this to do with Madeleine McCann?

An explanation as to why those 'major threats' conceived across the pond have had a relatively short shelf-life on this side of the water until now would be a little tedious, as the reasons are pretty obvious (a visiting Martian would surely aim for a larger tract of land, for instance). So, if we may simply accept it to be the case, we can open up the need for others to come quickly off the substitute's bench. There's nothing like the threat of an epidemic, for instance, to get healthcare professionals excited. The pharmaceutical industry is wholly indifferent to whether it originates in birds, pigs or cattle, as long as the claim is made that the disorder can, and therefore will, cross the species divide. Mass vaccination is a real money-spinner.

Then there's the threat of global warming, and related environmental considerations. Nowadays the cost of a UK road fund licence is determined by the level of carbon di-oxide emissions from the vehicle in question (the lower, the cheaper). Is this really to encourage drivers to become environmentally conscious through their operation of smaller cars boasting lower levels of fuel consumption and associated emissions? Or is it to provide yet another boost to the automotive trade, by encouraging the widespread purchase of newer vehicles through financial coercion? Well, it seems to have worked, as the current government is now in not-quite-secret talks with motor manufacturers, in an attempt to establish how best to recoup the revenue loss consequent upon the widespread switching of owners to cars in lower tax categories.

I have deliberately saved the most relevant, Maddie-related threat for last.

Followers of the case will not need to be reminded of the frequency with which the spectre of paedophilia has been introduced into the media commentary. As threats go this one is by no means new (this particular deviance is chronicled as accompanying imperial decadence in ancient Rome), but the threat has grown in perceived importance down the years. In the more recent past, cases of fatal child abuse, such as those involving Myra Hindley and the Wests, have occasionally erupted into the public spotlight. But the eruptions have since become more frequent, including false-positives to help sustain levels of public attention.

Film makers profit from being alive to 'topicality.' Note therefore a remake of the film 'The Wicker Man' after a thirty-three year interval (the original was released in 1973). In-between we had the infamous 1991 Orkney child abuse scandal, characterized by its actually being a case of widespread non-abuse, i.e. normality (the scandalous element was the behaviour of the so-called welfare authorities). Needless to say, mere suspicion of the demon provoked a witch-hunt, just as it did in the case of Operation Ore, a turn-of-the-millennium persecution of suspected child pornographers, modelled on an American precedent (Operation Avalanche), and being both principal product and funding sponge of CEOP (you know, the Jim Gamble vehicle that justified his appearance in Praia da Luz alongside genuine investigators).

Yes, folks. In the absence of an imminent national catastrophe occasioned by a nuclear strike (the 2003 invasion of Iraq took care of that), or a widespread disease epidemic, child abuse is a serious threat to society; a threat which the British government not only acknowledged but demonstrated a willingness to deal with decades ago. Such moral guardianship is 'politically correct' in a big way; especially if you are New Labour, the resurgent broom promising to sweep society clean by being 'tough,' not just on crime but 'on the causes of crime.'

Fast-forward now to Praia da Luz, Portugal on May 3, 2007. A little girl is reported missing from her holiday apartment. Within hours the report is an international one of a little British girl abducted from an apartment in Portugal. In a demonstration of due diligence, ambassadorial staff are dispatched to the scene of the incident, in order to offer support to our distressed citizens overseas. UK police also arrive to assist. A good thing. Within just a few days however, reports come back of doubts attending the veracity of the parents' story. A bad thing. And suddenly there is a serious and altogether unexpected problem.

There will always be unfortunate individuals who fall victim to crime, whether at home or abroad. By and large, unless they invite the transgression, they are afforded sympathy. On learning of a child abduction, and with no grounds for other suspicion, it is entirely reasonable that people in general should be sympathetic toward the parents. They were in this case. So too was the government. For the vast majority of observers nothing will have changed for quite a period. Even we sceptics, long since allowed access to the Portuguese police files, can have had no idea at the time of the precise details of the investigation outside of the sometime contradictory accounts coursing through the various media channels. Damaged shutters or no, no one was privy to anything like the hard data sufficient to confirm any growing suspicions, even remotely, never mind absolutely. No one, that is, save for the investigating team, which included British police, and British government representatives.

All the while the culprit could be identified as an anonymous stranger, the stigma of his (or her) motive could be brandished in support of sympathy for the parents. But what if they themselves were involved in some way? That would make them accomplices at least to an act of aggression against a minor, child abuse if you will. And if there were no third-parties involved? Then, in the light of there being no abduction, the parents would have to be viewed as guilty of something altogether more serious. And early 'intel' pointed to exactly that. So what was at stake here?

The exposure of a homicidal doctor capable of doing away with their patients (or their wife!), while not conducive to good image-building, is something from which the NHS could always recover. Society has not lost its faith in general medicine on account of Harold Shipman, any more than it did in the wake of earlier cases (e.g. Palmer, Crippen, Buck Ruxton). But a doctor (or doctors) culpable in the demise of their own child? That one hadn't previously been tested. Furthermore this was not a 'domestic' incident, in the sense that neither it nor its ramifications were confined to the UK. It happened (and was developing) overseas, in the full glare of international publicity (the McCanns themselves had seen to that). In addition, those at the very centre of the investigation, the case being one of child abuse whether abduction was a feature or not, were esteemed professionals, not the sort of council estate refugees with whom one might more instinctively associate such a crime. Worse yet, a clutch of others just like them were quite possibly involved in some way. The equation: A handful of UK doctors = one dead child, if valid, could have an impact worldwide on the perception of the medical profession, British society and, by extrapolation, the government, analogous to e=mc2.

A morally upright government, ostensibly; one seriously concerned with combating the child abuse they had already identified as a threat to society, sponsoring the activities of CEOP and taking yet another lead from the USA, was looking at the enemy, the very threat the executive (police) were dealing with on our behalf, made manifest within the ranks of its very own professional classes (remember the declaration of 'war' on the consequences of one's own actions?). So when the un-named member of our ambassadorial staff questioned the wisdom of further government involvement in the case, he inadvertently placed the following options on the table:

1. Cut the parents adrift, let them take their chances and hope the investigation runs aground.

2. Support the parents to the hilt and ensure the investigation runs aground.

Now which of these alternatives, do we suppose, offers a guaranteed outcome?

The McCanns and their media allies have kept the case in public view for a long time. Had the Portuguese pursued their investigation to the point of prosecution, the McCanns, unlike the international media, would probably not have been quite so keen to advertise the 'situation' they would have 'found themselves in.' As we have seen since, Portuguese justice is slow moving. A criminal case brought against the McCanns, with the prospect of exposing an evil canker deeply embedded in British society, the very threat against which the British public were being warned and 'protected,' and at considerable cost, would itself go on for an uncomfortably long time. Such exposure would be blatant, widespread, and international.

Shortly after the McCanns' return from Portugal, the world learnt that they held certain legal insurance, in the form of the available services of extradition lawyer Michael Caplan Q.C. Caplan had previously gained an international reputation through his successful contribution to the legal arguments that forestalled extradition, from the UK, of General Augusto Pinochet, erstwhile dictator of Chile. Ironically, it is this very case to which one may turn for a paradigmatic explanation of the British government's treatment of the McCanns.

Under the auspices of a Labour government, Pinochet was arrested and held, pending extradition, in accordance with an international arrest warrant issued in Spain. As things turned out, upholding the letter of international law did the government no favours politically (Pinochet had been a US 'transplant' originally and latterly a confidante of Margaret Thatcher. Despite its declared neutrality, Chile played a positive, albeit subtle role in the Falklands conflict, on Britain's behalf). Following extensive legal wrangling in the House of Lords (the prisoner was under 'house arrest' but not on trial as such), Pinochet was not extradited to Spain after all. Instead, in March 2000, he was allowed by Home Secretary Jack Straw to return to Chile, having been diagnosed as suffering from Alzheimer's disease, a condition from which he appeared to recover appreciably once his plane had touched down.

Less than a decade later the young democracy of Portugal found itself upholding the letter of the law within its own land, investigating and proceeding toward the prosecution of two members from a coven of British doctors. The Labour government, having previously learned an important lesson about law, even international law, versus international relations, could not fail to see this as 'not a good development.' There followed protracted negotiations (cf. 'legal arguments'). The Portuguese, no doubt reminded of the Pinochet case, as it was ignited by their immediate neighbours, Spain, took the hint. Eventually the suspect status of the McCanns was rescinded, the case shelved and the oh-so-nearly-accused doctors allowed to return to the UK, with little or no prospect of their emerging subsequently from the bunker.

So now where are we?

Unless or until a clear case is made in a criminal court somewhere, the McCanns are legally not guilty of involvement in their daughter's disappearance (it's been said often enough). There is no case for them to answer, and certainly not outside of a court of law. Whatever they might say to the media, or however they choose to appear before them, there is no risk of a conspicuous slur against the medical profession, NHS appointments criteria, the more affluent echelons of society or the government itself.

The only snag for a government sponsoring the McCanns' liberty is that, like victims of their own blackmail, they would now have to maintain the new status quo. In short, the McCanns would have to be kept out of court, at least for the duration of the administration, if not for the duration - period. The Serious Fraud Office won't be knocking on their door any time soon therefore.

So, as 'the Fund' slowly atrophies to the point where it is finally acknowledged that Madeleine is dead and the 'search' need not continue, Kate McCann is found a 'role,' at a level appropriate to the replacement of her GP status, while Gerry can devote time - a lot of time - to writing up the results of his many publicly funded studies. And the Portuguese? Well, if they really must bow to internal pressure and re-open their investigation, then there are hundreds of 'investigative opportunities' they can occupy themselves with for the foreseeable future.

Such is the legacy of a Labour government. But that party is now on the other side of the House. Does this mean the new administration will 'do the right thing' by all those who believe Madeleine McCann was not abducted, not to mention the Portuguese, scoring party political brownie points in the process? Unfortunately no. Any accommodation previously arrived at between the two governments will have been by negotiation and agreement, and since the Portuguese will have been equally party to it (even if the terms were unequal) they would not appreciate this being brought out into the open, as undoubtedly it would be. Also, international relations transcend party politics. The 'special relationship,' so-called, between Britain and the USA, for example, is maintained, and generally workable, whatever combination of Democrat-Republican-Conservative-Labour forearms engages in the diplomatic hand-shaking. And that gives rise to a testable hypothesis:

If the Metropolitan Police should exercise the investigative option contained within their Operation Grange remit (as clearly they ought to), then we may be sure that the current government in Westminster is genuinely (and properly) distanced from the McCanns. If, on the other hand, they conclude their review with nothing more to show for it than a 'to do' list intended for the Portuguese, then we can be just as certain that the Coalition Government is continuing a policy toward the McCanns that was inaugurated by their predecessors, as whatever deals may have been struck with the Portuguese were struck before the Coalition took office.

Now this is interesting. The money the McCanns and Murdoch have made from the 'Madeleine story' as her mother likes to call it, is staggering...The Dr.David Payne 'paedophile scoop' without a doubt would have put a stop to that and the Maddie fund !

David Payne May Hold The Key To Maddie Mystery

Since the 16th of May 2007, the British authorities posessed an official formal complaint presented by Katherine and Arul Gaspar, regarding suspicions about David Payne's behaviour which might be consistent with paedophilia acts.

These statements only entered the Portuguese Public Ministry's Process of investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance in January 2008 - the third version of the famous rogatory letters had already been sent to the Home Office - read: 'English tantrum delays McCanns process'. It is unknown if these statements were followed up by both forces in the United Kingdom and in Portugal.

The Gaspars, both doctors and former friends of the Paynes and of the McCanns, explain in the following statements what led them to present the criminal complaint: the time was in September of 2005, the place Mallorca....read more

The News of the World spiked an exclusive story exposing the science fiction writer Arthur C Clarke as a paedophile, according to a new book about life inside the newspaper whose closure was announced a year ago today.

In Hack, an account of his nerve-shredding days as a reporter on the News of the World and then the Sunday Mirror, Graham Johnson claims that although the NOTW prided itself on outing pederasts, editors made an exception for Mr Clarke because he was a friend of Rupert Murdoch.

Through BSkyB, the tycoon commercially exploited the futurologist's theory that satellites would be ideal for communications and praised him in public. As a result, according to Mr Johnson, who by that time had been sacked by the NOTW and had joined the Sunday Mirror, a story by reporter Roger Insall about Mr Clarke's alleged abuse of adolescent boys was never published for fear of upsetting the proprietor.

Tipped off about the story, the Sunday Mirror sent Mr Johnson to Colombo, where he extracted an confession from the author that he paid boys for sex. "I have never had the slightest interest in children – boys or girls. They should be treated in the same way. But once they have reached the age of puberty, then it is OK," Mr Clarke was quoted as saying in the Sunday Mirror. "If the kids enjoy it and don't mind it doesn't do any harm … there is a hysteria about the whole thing in the West."

Mr Clarke subsequently denied he was a paedophile, saying: "The allegations are wholly denied." But he never sued the Sunday Mirror and died aged 90 at his Sri Lanka home in 2008.

Speaking to The Independent yesterday, Mr Johnson said: "Roger [Insall] said that because Arthur C Clarke was a mate of Rupert Murdoch, the editor wasn't having any of it and despite Roger getting a lot of evidence that Clarke was a paedophile they wouldn't publish it."

Yesterday, Phil Hall, the then editor, said: "I can vaguely remember that story.

I do remember that Roger Insall worked on it and I remember it was not published. My only recollection is that the only reason we wouldn't publish it was because of legal reasons."

He said Mr Murdoch never asked him to spike stories. News International, publisher of the NOTW, made no comment.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

High court told of message referring to hacking of 'well known individual' during hearing on civil claims against NoW publisher

Phone hacking: the high court has been told of a 'significant' email from a News International executive. Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

The existence of an email of "enormous significance" written by a News International executive that refers to the phone hacking of a "well-known individual" has emerged in the high court, in a hearing to discuss the progress of civil claims against the publisher of the News of the World.Mr Justice Vos, presiding, said that the email was "sent by an executive whose identity you know" – but the name of the author, the precise content of the message, and who it was discussing remain confidential for legal reasons. But that did not stop lawyers representing hacking victims from asserting the importance of the communication.

David Sherbone, representing hacking victims in the high court on Wednesday, said that Vos should "understand the enormous significance of that email" which referred to a "well-known individual victim" and that the message contained "an instruction relating to an individual's phone".

In carefully choreographed proceedings, the court also heard that the email was first uncovered in March by News International's lawyers Linklaters in response to a search request made by the Met police. However, its existence was only disclosed to lawyers acting for hacking victims on Tuesday.

Sherborne said that he was concerned that this email was not disclosed to victims earlier even though it was of "obvious significance".

The significance of the email was underlined when Vos demonstrated to Sherborne how Linklaters would have found it using a "good old-fashioned" manual search.

In a moment of light-hearted banter, Vos motioned with his computer mouse and said the law firm would have gone up and down the inbox and outboxes on various accounts and when they came across the email would have stopped and said "gosh".

He joked that if Sherborne had had access to the inboxes, he would have put the email at the "top of the pile" of evidence, while "they [Linklaters] would put it somewhere near the bottom".Vos added that Linklaters failed to tell phone-hacking claimants or the Leveson inquiry, he understood that the lawyers had "apologised and said in future they will do better".

Earlier the high court heard that the number of people suing News International over phone hacking by the News of the World is expected to double to 100. Hugh Tomlinson QC, for phone-hacking claimants, told Vos that 417 people had started the process of civil action and obtained disclosure of information from the publisher.

The Met police and about 50 of those were expected to go ahead with a full high court action against News International. He said this group was in addition to the 50 who had already lodged whose numbers include Cherie Blair, Wayne Rooney, footballer Peter crouch and actor James Nesbitt.

Tomlinson said many of those who had started the process of legal action were unhappy with the disclosure of information from News International and would lodge claims by the court's deadline of August. "At least tens of claimants who are proposing to issue claims rather than go through the [News International] compensation scheme or engage in direct settlement," Tomlinson said.

News international opened a voluntary compensation scheme for phone-hacking victims last year in a bid to deal with the growing scandal effectively. Michael Silverleaf, QC for News international, told the High court that the publisher had received 247 inquiries to the scheme with 79 settlements so far.

Friday, July 13, 2012

The British public were told that the new information technology, heralded by The Sun's move to Wapping, would bring a greater variety of newspapers and a more diverse media. But it produced a contracted press controlled by ever fewer proprietors. John Pilger describes the downfall of his old paper and the all-pervasive influence of Rupert Murdoch.

The Daily Mirror was the mother of all tabloids, and they were good at what they did. It was also 'tabloids' in the best sense of the word: they cared about their subjects and their listeners and earned their trust and affection...This film is a personal tribute, but it's also the story of what happened to the once popular Mirror. How did it change? What happened? And how it explains the descent and cutthroat social bloodbath that has become modern media. The Murdoch Effect will shatter your conceptions of how ruthless the media has become -- and how it doesn't have to be that way.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

Baretta star Robert Blake let rip at Piers Morgan during a sensational interview last night where he finally opened up about being acquitted of his wife's murder.The 78-year-old actor was in full combat mode as he launched into a profanity-laden tirade against Piers - who questioned him about how truthful he was being about the incident.Blake was acquitted of wife Bonnie Lee Bakley's murder in 2005 following a spell in prison - and four years after the killing, in which Bakley was shot in the head while sitting in a car outside a Los Angeles restaurant they had just dined at.Scroll down for video...

Breaking his silence: Robert Blake appeared on the Piers Morgan Tonight show yesterday after keeping a low profile for several years, opening up about his acquittal of his wife's murder

But the actor was found liable for her wrongful death by a Californian court in the same year and ordered to pay $30m as part of a civil action taken by Bakley's children.Firing at Morgan, Blake said: 'You want to get to the truth if you can. Does that mean I'm lying to you? Tell me where I'm lying.Morgan retorted: 'I'm not saying you're lying.'Blake then went on: 'But you say you don't know if I'm telling the truth, what the hell's the difference?'

Pulling no punches: The 78-year-old actor laid into Piers after the host questioned him about how truthful he was being. He also called Piers 'Charlie Potatoes' and referred to him as 'Pierce'

'I'm saying I've met you for, what, 20 minutes?' Morgan replied, before, asking the In Cold Blood actor: 'Why are you being so defensive?'Things then got even more heated, with Blake spitting back: 'Because you just insulted me … nobody tells me I'm a liar

Killed: Bonnie Lee Bakley was gunned down outside a Los Angeles restaurant in May 2001

'You said I might not be telling the truth. What the hell is the difference? … I've never allowed anybody to ask me the questions that you're asking. I allowed you to do that because I trust you. 'And I would have assumed that you and that guy in your ear would trust me. And if you don't, then we'd better start talking about The Little Rascals.'Blake grew angrier still, attempting to dismiss the murder case as 'boring' and irrelevant.And in the second part of the show he called Morgan 'Charlie Potatoes,' and continued to refer to his as 'Charlie' until the end of the interview when he called him 'Pierce'.Blake, who maintained a low profile since his acquittal and filing for bankruptcy, was on Pier's CNN Tonight show to plug his new memoir, Tales of a Rascal: What I did for Love.Elsewhere in the interview he opening up about his feelings towards his second wife, who died aged 44, ultimately blaming the murder an unknown person from her past.Describing her as a con artist, he said he believed someone she had 'burned' tracked her down and shot her.He described his relationship with Bakley - who he was married to for just six months before her death - as 'not bad' (Bakley's marriage to Blake was her tenth).But he went on: 'I think she came to Hollywood to con her way into show business.

Portrait of a couple: Robert and Bonnie pictured on holiday in Sequoia National Park, California, in April 2001, just a month before her death

'I felt sorry for her sometimes because God never gave her that little piece of sunshine that he gave me.'Blake went on to say he didn't know Bonnie 'well enough to know her'.'I love her - well, I love you as a human being. You're my brother in arms,' Blake described. 'We're all in this thing together. But we were not dramatically in love or things like that.'He also didn't pull any punches against the law enforcement officials who dealt with him during his spell in custody.Looking and pointing into the camera, as if addressing them, he raged: 'I was supposed to die in that cell, wasn't I?

Off the hook: Blake seen breaking down in tears after being acquitted of this wife's 2001 murder in a 2005 criminal court hearing

'But I didn't die. And you didn't get your book deals, you mothers! I wrote a book about you.'

His story: The actor was promoting his memoir, Tales of a Rascal: What I did for Love

Admitting he was bankrupt and friendless these days, Blake said the only thing that will 'cure' him would be to 'get back on that bull that bucked me off and ride him'.He added: 'If I can go out in front of the camera, making the most beautiful film that I ever made, that's all I really want from life.'Bakley was shot in the head on May 4 2001 after Blake took her to Vitello's Restaurant on Tujunga Avenue in Studio City.She was sat in the car, parked around the corner from the restaurant at the time of the incident.At the time, Blake told police he had gone back inside the restaurant to retrieve the gun he had left at the table - and came back to the car after the shooting.His gun - a .38 caliber pistol - was tested and determined not to be the murder weapon.Bakley had an obsession with pursuing celebrities and even had a fling with rock legend Jerry Lee Lewis. She had one child with Blake - Rose Lenore Sophia Blake, now aged 12. Rose was initially named Christian Shannon Brando as Bakley first believed Christian Brando - the son of Hollywood great Marlon Brando - was the father - but a DNA test disproved this.

Heyday: Blake was best know for his role in the Seventies TV show Baretta

Police and other public officials are still being offered thousands of pounds for information about the private lives of celebrities, The Independent can reveal.

An investigation by Exaro, the investigative website, www.exaronews.com, found that officials such as probation and prison officers are being targeted by a former Metropolitan Police forensics and surveillance officer now running a news agency selling pictures and stories to newspapers.

This is despite the current police investigation into the alleged bribing of public officials by journalists, and the Leveson inquiry into media ethics.

Today a prison officer and two other people were arrested in connection with the police probe into corrupt payments to officials by journalists.

So far a total of 37 people have been arrested in connection with Operation Elveden, the investigation into suspected corrupt payments to public officials.

But despite this Newspics, a press agency based in Shenfield, Essex, still appears to be offering four-figure sums for ‘scoops’ through its website.

The agency claims endorsements from the picture desk of The People, the red-top Sunday tabloid, OK magazine, the celebrity title, and the Press Association, the national news agency. The Independent has published legitimate photographs taken by Newspics photographers.

“Do you know of a story, a scandal, something that made you interested, chances are that a newspaper will pay for that information. Do you know where a prominent person is living or what they get up to, is a celebrity having an affair that you know of, do you know anyone who’s on reality TV? You can earn yourself good cash now by calling.

It then adds: “All sorts of people have been paid thousands of pounds by us for giving information that leads to a picture being sold or a story being written, are you a doorman, police worker, civil servant, probation officer, prison officer, nurse? Make some extra money without anyone ever knowing…”

Newspics is run by Matt Sprake a former forensics and surveillance officer for Scotland Yard who carried out anti-terrorism duties during his 10-year police career.

Sprake runs the agency with his wife, Marion, a banker who has been working for Barclays. He claims to have a network of 35 photographers, and a discreet studio “just 20 minutes from the City of London” for celebrity client portraits.

Part of his agency’s website is devoted to its “surveillance photography”, offering a menu of services, including “covert foot follows”, “covert vehicle follows” and ”remote technical surveillance”.

“You can utilise the very same skills that are used by the security services and the police,” clients are promised.

“Our surveillance team has worked for and been trained by various police and government surveillance agencies within the UK. If you need it photographed without being seen, we are your experts.”

When contacted by Exaro, Sprake defended himself, saying that he had never paid a police officer or “anyone in authority” for information.

He said that he had wanted to remove the wording discovered by Exaro, but he was unable to do so because the website was “broken”.

“I wish I could change this website,” he said. “It was by three different companies and when one of them went bust, we could not change the website. It was a pain.”

But he told Exaro that he exercised caution with tip-offs: “I would not touch anything that is operational or compromising. We had people contact us on stories like the royal family, for example. My first question was, ‘How do you know that?’

“‘Well, I have heard it in a briefing.’

“‘Sorry, can’t touch it.’”

Sprake said that the wording on his agency’s website was “just advertising” aimed at the “general public”.

On the social-media website, Myspace, he puts his income at between £100,000 and £150,000 a year.

Sprake continued: “I used to work for a specialist department at the Met in Scotland Yard looking, basically, at terrorism work. The level I was working at involved very covert stuff.

“I got out after 10 years. You are limited on the number of years you are allowed to do, so I am now doing other work. But I have still got all that training that is very handy to have.”

He says that police officers contact him to “moan” about their conditions.

He also claims that his agency is “monitored by some departments in the Met for where some of our stories have come from.”

“You have got to be very careful whenever you get information from a police officer.

They are not going to be paid because it is obviously illegal.

The story will only be put forward if they have obtained that information through something that would be general information.

“If they ring up and say I have seen this bit of paper and this story is going on, well, we do not touch that because that would be highly illegal. So we are very careful.”

He said that most of the agency’s press work came directly from newspapers rather than information given by sources.

Mr Sprake said that he “adhered” to the code of conduct of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), which is a claim made by his agency on its website in relation to its surveillance work.

However, a PCC spokesman said that the code did not apply to picture agencies or freelance photographers. “This highlights the same issue that Lord Leveson has already raised: whether agency photographers or the paparazzi, as well as editors, should be covered by the code.”